HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7181  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2009, 4:51 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by XLucky4LifeX View Post
🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 LA lost those awesomeness historical buildings or w/e.
But whenever something is destroyed, something better happens.

Should I use the Twin Towers as an example? Thought it was reallllyyy sad that thousands of people died. Ionno but I heard that Twin Towers were used to be hated cause it was rectangle and it surpassed Empire State Building. Then it got destroyed, people started loving it cause they felt sad for it. It helped architectures and technology better, and inspired people to build more skyscrapers. Then they are now building a new WTC which will represent America and people won't hate anymore

I'm sure that something better will happen to those demolished buildings.
I can't believe that I'm responding to this but the Twins were hated right after they were completed. But over time they because not only the symbol for New York City but of America as a whole. They were a symbol of America's financial power.

And not everthing that gets destroyed is replaced by something better. For example, going back to those old pictures of Los Angeles, I bet you didn't know that LA destroyeda really awesome building to make way for 2 nice but unremarkable buildings.

The Richfield Building.



Was destroyed to build the Arco Towers (or whatever they are called now).
__________________
Washed Out
     
     
  #7182  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2009, 6:43 PM
RuFFy's Avatar
RuFFy RuFFy is offline
FlyyyFALiiFe
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 364
^^^ While I like City National Plaza, it's a real shame we had to lose the Richfield to get it. I've always admired that building for some reason, maybe because the roof isn't flat, I don't know. Either way, it's a shame, IMO.
     
     
  #7183  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2009, 8:52 PM
Kingofthehill's Avatar
Kingofthehill Kingofthehill is offline
International
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oslo
Posts: 4,046
Quote:
XLucky4LifeX
Damn, has this thread dipped to a new low-point ?
     
     
  #7184  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2009, 9:21 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,652
^ I think we've all moved on from JDRCRASH.
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
     
     
  #7185  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2009, 9:28 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100


Hey, it's better than having a certain forumer who hopes to move to NYC or Chicago and constantly puts our city down with his troll-like remarks. **cough** Ed--va **cough**
__________________
Revelation 21:4

Last edited by JDRCRASH; Jun 11, 2009 at 9:40 PM.
     
     
  #7186  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2009, 9:50 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100
From Los Angeles Times:

Ordinance brings new life into downtown L.A.'s Main Street


Lawrence K. Ho / Los Angeles Times
Diners sit outdoors at Pete’s Cafe and Bar at 4th and Main. The San Fernando Building, which houses the restaurant, was developed into lofts by Tom Gilmore. Gilmore is credited with the reinvention of the historic core.

__________________________________________________________
The stretch between 4th and 6th was once the scene of homeless encampments.
Today, boutiques and cafes cater to new residents. The catalyst was the adaptive reuse ordinance, launched 10 years ago.


By Cara Mia DiMassa

9:54 PM PDT, June 10, 2009

A decade ago, the stretch of downtown L.A.'s Main Street between 4th and 6th streets was a desolate collection of empty buildings and homeless encampments, an area where drug dealing was conducted in the open, and the only longtime residents lived in residential hotels. These days, that stretch resembles a bustling small-town main street.

There's the neighborhood bookstore, where an attentive shopkeeper knows her customers by name. A DVD store that stocks the kind of films that appeal to the hip residents who live in the building upstairs. And shop owners and customers who live side by side above the stores.






Lawrence K. Ho / Los Angeles Times
The adaptive reuse law made it easier to convert former bank, office and industrial buildings.


While much of downtown is struggling to attract the kind of ground-floor retail that many urbanists say is essential to turning a cluster of residential units into something more like a neighborhood, downtown's historic core has been seeing a surge forward lately.

Some downtown boosters who track such developments say that the vast majority of retail space along Main Street, from 4th to 7th Street, is now leased -- an accomplishment that they are touting as a sign of the neighborhood's successful reinvention.

The changes along Main Street -- and in downtown's historic core in general -- were launched 10 years ago this month, when a new city ordinance went into effect that made it easier to convert former bank, office and industrial buildings into residential and small retail spaces.


The ordinance was little noticed at the time. But the adaptive reuse ordinance, as it is known, has profoundly changed the way the city thinks about its long-neglected urban center. It streamlined the city's permitting process for those seeking to re-purpose the old buildings and allowed for flexibility in the city's zoning and code requirements.

"After decades of beating a dead horse, they realized that commercial was not going to come back to this neighborhood the way it was," said Bert Green, owner of an art gallery at 5th and Main. "It made sense to change the use of the buildings."

In 1999, downtown Los Angeles was an area very much in transition. The Staples Center had just opened. Walt Disney Concert Hall, L.A. Live and other downtown attractions were still years away from opening. Only 18,000 people lived in the city center.

"We had offices, we had some cultural attractions," said Carol Schatz, president and chief executive of the Central City Assn., a business advocacy group that pushed for the change. "But the one thing that we knew we needed to make downtown survive and thrive was residents."

While bigger, more extravagant projects for downtown were announced, and some even got underway, Historic Downtown kept plugging away.

"It may have been constructed," said developer Tom Gilmore, who many credit as the architect of the historic core's reinvention, "but it's not contrived."

Apartments and lofts in buildings were rented; some condos sold and retail spaces slowly began to fill along both Main and Spring streets. An art walk highlighted the assortment of galleries in the area. Restaurants began to draw people from beyond downtown.

"The community was organically grown by seeing what was needed and what could survive as destination retail," said Brady Westwater, a local activist and the former president of the Downtown L.A. Neighborhood Council, who has been instrumental in bringing businesses to the area.

Still, life in Historic Downtown is not for everyone. The area, just a few blocks away from Skid Row, continues to be a magnet for the homeless. It is still gritty and lacks the sort of luxurious high rises as other parts of the city center.

But even as other parts of downtown have seen some large-scale projects canceled and other condo developments switch to rentals as a way to ride out the economic storm, Historic Downtown has continued to collect new businesses: clothing stores, restaurants, bars and other amenities. Two new affordable housing projects are being developed.

Residents and shop owners in the area say that the relatively low cost of space in the area, combined with a certain amount of flexibility, has allowed them to take a chance in the area.

Jose Caballer, who lives in Gilmore's San Fernando building and runs a digital design firm out of an old bank building a few doors to the west, said that part of the appeal of the area is that it's like a sort of undiscovered country. "You can go and look at buildings and say, I want to do events here. If you are creative and resourceful enough . . . you can do it."

Brittany Hoa Pham, owner of Fremont clothing, said that her location along 4th Street has meant that, "We get an interesting group of people." But she admits that "once in a while, a homeless man or woman comes in and frightens me."

The challenge now for Historic Downtown, said Gilmore, is "how we end up a sustainable neighborhood, not a flash in the pan."

That's something that has been taking up a lot of Westwater's time recently.

After seeing success along Main and Spring streets, he has turned his attention to Broadway, where recent community efforts have focused on finding new uses for a collection of old movie houses and retail and office space along the street.

"We showed we could fix Main Street," he said. "Now, the challenge of developing a Broadway that works for everyone is the next step."

[email protected]
__________________
Revelation 21:4
     
     
  #7187  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2009, 10:32 PM
LAsam LAsam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,952
^ I didn't realize Edluva was writing for the LA Times these days!
     
     
  #7188  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 3:11 AM
makoy731 makoy731 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 30


does anyone know what will occupy this building in the Arts District?
     
     
  #7189  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 4:43 AM
citywatch citywatch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 6,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeHundred View Post

Interesting old pic! I can recognize about 4 bldgs in that pic, inc the Embassy auditorium bldg, the old Fed Reserve bldg (now converted into lofts), the Title guarantee bldg (now also a loft bldg), the bldg (don't know its name) directly next to the Skyline condo & Metropolitan apt bldg, & the old Barker bros bldg, now west of Macy's Plaza. And I think the Fig hotel, with its 3 wing design, can be seen way over to the left. The old Desmond's bldg can be seen right in front of the unnamed bldg that's next to the Metropolitan apt bldg.

That shot also is the reason that I think DT, in some important ways, is better today than it was even when the hood was more of the center of the city.

I have a hunch there may even be more ppl of some means living in the hood today than there were over 60 yrs ago, or certainly from the 1940s & onward, when ppl started running off to the burbs. And no wonder, since there weren't too many nice places even back then where ppl with some $$ could call home in DT.

I've read that Bunker hill, which originally was where some rich folk set up their homes, started to go to seed by the 1920s. Not too surprising, since that pic shows the hood in general wasn't scenic or rich enough to make successful ppl treat it the way they'd treat those cities that never went into a big decline to begin with.
     
     
  #7190  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 9:19 AM
RAlossi RAlossi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by makoy731 View Post

does anyone know what will occupy this building in the Arts District?
Hewitt First, formerly condos and will now be apartments (via Curbed - website not updated yet).

http://hewittfirst.com/
     
     
  #7191  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 11:39 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,118
pure comedy. only in an la forum

i'd take the richfield over city national any day of the week. screw the skyline. we have no hope in building a venerable one to begin with so who cares. such concentrated class a office space has never been justified in our city's existence. our cbd (like la itself) is an existential crisis of urban form - unlike with other cities, it has no reason to exist save for CRA's declaration in 1955 that LA shall have a traditional cbd whether it needs one or not. and so LA built its cbd like a kid builds a playhouse - as ornamentation stemming from some juvenile imagination or desire, in la's case, to see la as a real city (as opposed to actually bearing it out of necessity). basically our cbd is the urban equivalent of childhood role play.

the young twentysomething who deliberately ventures into dtla or elsewhere without a car to be "urban hip" - he's playing dress up too. he's nothing like the neapolitan who is a casual and unwitting specimen of his urban environment. stage props can only make an actor appear so real, and so far, the idea of an urban la is a stage prop.

that's why i don't get into a fit over our cbd's fate. la's future has never been decided by it. it is going to be decided by wilshire subway, expo, 405 line, etc.

Last edited by edluva; Jun 12, 2009 at 12:29 PM.
     
     
  #7192  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 2:49 PM
makoy731 makoy731 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
the young twentysomething who deliberately ventures into dtla or elsewhere without a car to be "urban hip" - he's playing dress up too. he's nothing like the neapolitan who is a casual and unwitting specimen of his urban environment. stage props can only make an actor appear so real, and so far, the idea of an urban la is a stage prop.
I think people should be encourage to take metro into dtla or elsewhere when possible. Not to be "urban hip" but for 3 main reasons: 1st, the environment, 2nd to save money on gas, car maintenance, and parking fees and 3rd, to avoid the hassle of traffic. When I lived in the LB area and worked in the Valley, I took the metro for about 3 years... not to be "urban hip" but because I didn't want to deal with the traffic and the fact that I saved money doing it. Now that I live a mile away from work, I don't need to take public transit. I still take it when possible such us having lunch with family or friends. I've ALWAYS taken the red line when I'm having dinner with family in China Town which is a pretty regular thing. A number of my friends take it to get to work not to be "urban hip" but because it save's them money and time.

I find it funny that some people complain about LA's public transit option's not extensive enough or not a lot of people ride it but when someone actually rides it other than because they have to... it seems like they're being accused of wanting to be "urban hip".
     
     
  #7193  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 3:13 PM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,881
^ interesting comments.

while entertaining, i do want to respond to say that everyone brings up good points. dtla is much of a 'facade' as edluva points out, but i dont think that should stop people from going there or stop people from improving/developing it. what makes a place is not just the buildings, ITS THE PEOPLE. as la improves its transit options, it will more and more start to look like "new urbanism." these things take time tho, you cant change the feel of a city overnight.

and keep posting people. while i rarely contribute since i live a few hundred miles away, i regularly read this thread to keep up on la. some things people say may sound stupid to other people but in order to have a true discussion, everyone should be allowed to speak (type).

and thanks for those pix threehundred. the richfield looks wayy better than those modernist monstrosities.
__________________
"I firmly believe, from what I have seen, that this is the chosen spot of all this Earth as far as Nature is concerned." - Luther Burbank on Sonoma County.

Pictures of Santa Rosa, So. Co.
     
     
  #7194  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 4:00 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100
^ Yes, but there comes a point to whether it's true or not, consistent negative comments like Edluva's waste everyone's time because they speak backwards, not forwards. We outta hire Tom In Chicago or Steely Dan as LA moderators, because they would NEVER allow such comments if they were about Chicago, so why should we give forumers like Edluva a free pass on trolling?

Colemonkee, seriously; Edluva has been irritating forumers like LAB and I on the status quo of Downtown for a while now, and we're tired of it.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
     
     
  #7195  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 4:04 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,100
And BTW Edluva, I implore you to read the article I posted, because it highlights that although Downtown has a long way to go, it has great potential, particularly in the Historic Core.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
     
     
  #7196  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 5:20 PM
Steve2726's Avatar
Steve2726 Steve2726 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: L.A.
Posts: 482
This is a free country and Edluva can post whatever he wants. We need a devil's advocate and he plays the role well. Unlike the relentless boosterism in the Chicago forum, we are open to criticism as long as its constructive. We may disagree with Ed but he makes valid points. If you don't like what he says, use the "ignore" function.
     
     
  #7197  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 6:53 PM
RAlossi RAlossi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by northbay420 View Post
while entertaining, i do want to respond to say that everyone brings up good points. dtla is much of a 'facade' as edluva points out
Facade? How do you figure?
     
     
  #7198  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 9:21 PM
LAsam LAsam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
pure comedy. only in an la forum
Don't forget to tip your waitress!
     
     
  #7199  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 9:40 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Ascension
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by northbay420 View Post
^ interesting comments.

while entertaining, i do want to respond to say that everyone brings up good points. dtla is much of a 'facade' as edluva points out, but i dont think that should stop people from going there or stop people from improving/developing it. what makes a place is not just the buildings, ITS THE PEOPLE. as la improves its transit options, it will more and more start to look like "new urbanism." these things take time tho, you cant change the feel of a city overnight.

and keep posting people. while i rarely contribute since i live a few hundred miles away, i regularly read this thread to keep up on la. some things people say may sound stupid to other people but in order to have a true discussion, everyone should be allowed to speak (type).

and thanks for those pix threehundred. the richfield looks wayy better than those modernist monstrosities.
^ This.
__________________
Washed Out
     
     
  #7200  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 10:19 PM
Just-In-Cali's Avatar
Just-In-Cali Just-In-Cali is offline
Urbanite in Suburbia
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Angeles Metro
Posts: 563
Its funny how no matter what the downtown topic is, it somehow gets turned into a talk of Los Angeles' merit as a "true city" and how "un-realistic and clueless" its citizens are.
Everyone can express and opinion, but my gawd its depressing in here.

Many of the old structures being shown in the old pictures are spectacular, but, I truly don’t think had they all been left in place, it would have changed downtown's fate through the next 40 years. The biggest crime that was committed in LA and other Sunbelt cities is they came to be during the auto revolution. Chart the growth of every US city that came of age pre 1900 and then post 1900 and you can see that no matter how they may have started, most after 1900 ended up in the state LA is in now. All we would have had instead was a crowded and dead city core filled with even more dilapidated older structures and poverty because the population flight to the suburbs would have still occurred. Many of the "true" (I use the term loosely) cities out there have only in the last 10 to 15 years been able to get their city centers viable enough to be considered "desirable" again. Not that parking lots are better, but we would have had just a different set of problems today. The process of undoing that damage has begun, but we are a generation away from any real mass level changes.
If Ed is the devil's advocate (though even the devil would be taken aback at the cutting comments Ed is sometimes known for )..myself and a few others play the cautious optimists...basically keeping our fingers crossed.
__________________
Blue State Heaven
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:44 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.